Hypothetical question

[dean5125]

Another hypothetical question...  Would you have got the R over the GTI all things being equal apart from AWD v FWD and the associated price increase?

To be honest I took the GTI over another R after driving both in 7.5 guise and preferred how the GTI drove, price didn't worry me too much it was nothing more than a bonus the GTI was cheaper!

[fredgroves]

how much of the approx 1.6 seconds better 0-60 (4.6 vs 6.2) is down to power and how much down to the AWD ?

Two questions:

1) Laden or unladen?
2) African or European?

[Sootchucker]

    Fred, is that in homage to the late great Terry Jones from Monty Python fame ?

[fredgroves]

  Fred, is that in homage to the late great Terry Jones from Monty Python fame ?

Absoloutely!

 

[dean5125]

  Fred, is that in homage to the late great Terry Jones from Monty Python fame ?

Absoloutely!

 

  explains why it went straight over my head!! 

[Philip]

  Fred, is that in homage to the late great Terry Jones from Monty Python fame ?

Absoloutely!

 

That's no ordinary rabbit.. 

[Jim_mk7.5]

Was having a drink with my mate last night, and as usual we got onto the subject of cars. One question which popped up (totally hypothetical of course), was with an R having "just" a 55ps greater power output that a GTI PP but of course AWD, how much of the approx 1.6 seconds better 0-60 (4.6 vs 6.2) is down to power and how much down to the AWD ?

Furthermore, in this make believe world of mine, if VW had of produced a MK7.5 245ps GTI but equipped it with AWD, how much would that shave of it's 0-60 ?

My mate went onto to say that (like me) when he had his MK7 GTD, the official 0-60 time was around 7.5 seconds. It's sister car the Audi A3 sportback was available with the same 183ps engine in S-Line trim, but with AWD, and if I remember correctly, the 0-60 time on that car was down to around 6.8 seconds (so 0.7 seconds quicker just with AWD), and I think the A3 sportback was also slightly heavier. Sadly this wasn't available on the GTD (and never was). Obviously the car's aren't the same so it's a bit of a moot point anyway.

So there's no real purpose around the question and it will (and has) never happen, but just to conclude our discussion, what are your thoughts ?

The easiest way to answer this is to look at the closest car with the same engine and AWD. The A4 TSI Quattro.

Here are the stats and tech specs below. Audi is a chunk heavier. Pretty much same power. But nearly 0.5 sec quicker to 62. So I guess you could easily argue that AWD does make a good difference.

[dubber36]

Surely it would make more sense to compare a FWD A4 with a AWD one? Or equally, any model of car that has the same engine in both F/AWD options.

[Jim_mk7.5]

Surely it would make more sense to compare a FWD A4 with a AWD one? Or equally, any model of car that has the same engine in both F/AWD options.

Since the OP asked about his Golf and with this being a Golf forum, I opted to compare a Golf (with the same engined car in the VAG family) 


Think it shows that despite more weight, with the same power and AWD, the Audi is quicker off the mark. That's all I was showing.

[ar899]

Better performance in snow (rather than off the mark) would be what I would see as the benefit of AWD (if indeed there is much advantage of the R in that respect). I know we don't get much of the white stuff these days but did miss a weekend away couple of years ago as couldn't get out of town.....